tramp or tribe

Noah- What gets the credit for inspiring this thread
In his thread " Am I crazy" he posed a question relating to preperations that might include those who may not take preparedness as serious as he does.
That got me to thinking .
My question to you folks is whether it's better to go Guerrilla with a small crew or by yourself, or whether you would consider alligning yourself with a larger group of less prepared people to help them survive.
Granted my perspect is a little skewed by my experiences, but it has been my observation that a small group or an individual is easier to provide for, more flexable for adaptability, and easier to conceal both under cover or while on the move.
A larger group takes more provisions, has less adaptability on short notice, may not be mobile and is in short a larger target.
Keeping in mind that some in a larger group will undoubtable be survivors more due to luck than preparedness or skills.
I already recognize the moral imperitive of the strong defending the weak.
What i'm interested in is whether possibly sacrificeing yourself or your smaller group to help a larger less prepared group is contrary to the very premise of " survival "

Well 1Shot ,the group i mentioned, my girlfriend and her family and my friend and his wife aren't really prepared besides a few canned goods. You did better at saying what I was trying to say than I did. They aren't well prepared, compared to them I'm better prepared, compared to some or most members here on ATS I am not well prepared at all.

What I was wondering was Am I crazy to make preparations for others who aren't as well prepared as I even though they might decide to do there own thing in a Sitx leaving me to bug out alone.

I can only prepare for them, If they decided not to go I coouldn't force em.

Hope this clears it up alittle.

Noah,
I understand your situation. I think to some degree you have to prepare for those you love, even if they think you might be a little nuts.
I'm not sure whether you make those preperations for them, or for your own conscience but, I know it would be hard to live with yourself if you didn't.
I think in your case, in a sit-x it would be a question of quantity of life vs quality of life.
Maybe the determining factor is whether survival means anything if it doesn't also include our morality.

My question is a little broader than your specific circumstances.
What I'm wondering is whether sacrifice for stangers, is contrary to the premise of survival.

It could work out both ways sacrificing for a stranger,

1 they could become the best survival buddy helping out with food, defense, skills etc, or

2 they could kill you when your guard is down.

I believe it would come done to necessaity. Are you in a situation you won't survive, without another person helping or not.

Circumstances will help make the decision.

Listen to your heart. You will know what to do when the time comes. Keep the interest of everyone in mind in all dealings and decisions. Few enemies will not become friends when you take a genuine interest in their well being. This is a great secret from ancient times that has been cared for and coveted by the select few. So obvious yet out of reach for modern govts.

That being said in sitx its best to be alone in a small group or by yourself.

I try to be as prepared as possible without really giving a lot of thought as to how many and for how long. There are those I love and there are principles I live by, with or without sit-x. I want to have my loved ones with me but I can't force them. I can only hope that when the time comes they'll remember some of our conversations and react appropriately. I can't honestly say if I'll be alone or in a group. I like to think that I'm adaptable enough to make the right decisions when the time comes.

As someone that has gone it alone for a protracted period of time I can say that even a relatively unprepared group will increase the chances of survival in most scenarios.
If it is a true running type scenario then it might be better for you to be by yourself.
After any prolonged period alone most people will do anything for social interaction. There are very few people that stay away from others for very long.
Plus there is always something that others will contribute to the group that you cannot accomplish on your own. What about menial chores, watch duty, what if you become injured? So much really depends on the situation. For me even if I wanted to I could not go out on my own. I will not leave my wife and children for any reason. If we are separated it would be my main objective to reunite us.

respectively

reluctantpawn

reply to post by reluctantpawn


If you don't mind, i'll use your family as an example to illustrate my question.
If you have prepared your family, and you have survived the first stages of sit-x, and then encountered a group who were less prepared and therefor suffering deprivation.
Do you risk your family's safety to align yourself with strangers
to assist them ?
The reason for my question is that survival is a mindset that drives us to want to survive no matter what. So does risking your own or your family's survival go contrary to the essence of survival ?

reply to post by 1ShotDeal


It comes down to the person I think.

If you and yours are prepared and doign ok and then you come across a woman with 2 kids whose husband/whatever is no longer able to help and she is struggling, do you help? I probably would even if it meant less food for my own.

If you come across some grown men and they are just hanging around doing nothing for themaselves, do you help? Nope, sorry.

A small group would be good on the move due to mobility and the lower reguirements for sustenance. If you hunker down and try to grow food or create a stable situation it may be better to have a larger group for labor and combined defense.

In the beginning of Sit-x I would only worry about you and those close to you. If you survive the beginning you worry about the rest as it comes.
just depends on how far you personally are going to go to survive. There are some situations where you may have to do something to live that later you may not want to live with.

My two cents.

I agree with reluctantpawn and tinhatman for the most part. I would want at least one other with me. I have to sleep, no way around that, and I snore sometimes!

But my hope, since I live in a rural area, is to defend my property. In this case I would immediately make contact with my neighbors and see what we could put together for hunting, defense, etc. Of course food stores will go to my family first and shared with others as the situation dictates. I have saved things like my old wood stove to help neighbors in this scenario.

reply to post by 1ShotDeal


Oneshot,

That is a tough question and must be handled on an individual basis. I, as would many, would have a real problem turning away children. But, like Tinhatman would probably not think twice about turning away grown men, even at gunpoint if necessary. I don't mean to cop out on you but unless it was in real time I cannot give a straight yes or no answer. I guess I would help out with information without much reservation but hard won supplies would without a doubt stay with me and mine. An alignment with others would also depend on the situation and people involved. But yes, family would come first.

respectfully

reluctantpawn

edit for content

[edit on 11-2-2008 by reluctantpawn]